Comment by jgord

Comment by jgord 2 days ago

I thought thats why we had urls not only IP addresses ..

which reminds me, who has control over DOI.org ... eg. is it DOGE-safe ? likewise arXiv .. can it easily be co-opted / subsumed ?

sebmellen 2 days ago

I’ve met the folks behind DOI. Very nice people (Jonathan Clark in particular).

It’s an independent foundation and they have backups/contingency plans established with major universities to preserve the DOI records in the event the foundation fails.

https://www.doi.org/the-foundation/board-and-governance/

Reply View 8 replies

jgord 2 days ago

.. we need a Foundation .. and a second Foundation :]

Reply View | 1 reply
- hkt 2 days ago
  
  It's just like O'Brien always said.. you've _got_ to have a redundant backup.
  (Third foundation?)
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
j-pb 2 days ago

Their whole organisation should have been a hash function...
DOI must die

Reply View | 5 replies
- PaulHoule 2 days ago
  
  Should be done with Web3.
  
  Reply View | 4 replies
  
  j-pb 2 days ago
  
  Scientific publishing is one of the very few legit use cases for block-chains imo.
  But magnet links and the BitTorrent mainline hash-table are a better DOI than DOI.
  
  Reply View | 3 replies

__MatrixMan__ 2 days ago

Maybe it would be better to identify papers via a hash of their contents so that there's nothing to co-opt.

Reply View 1 reply

jgord a day ago

... theres an argument to having arXiv paper hashes, and/or important digitalia checksums put on a blockchain.
detect-ability of state-actor post-facto editing : DEI related or otherwise

Reply View | 0 replies